2010/1/14 Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com>:

> Given the ways ASSA has been defined, I think there are two possible camps
> within ASSA.  One that believes there is a next moment for you to
> experience, chosen randomly from among all, and another which believes there
> is no next moment, the observer is the observer moment, an eternal thought.
>  In that respect, ASSA would be more likely to tie the informational state
> to the consciousness rather than the computational process itself.  In the
> fixed, no next OM model, which one you find yourself is sampled from among
> all OMs, just who you start is is selected within RSSA.
> One might think it is absurd to believe they will never observer the next
> moment, that they might be stuck forever never having finished this
> sentence, and that 5 seconds from now will prove this idea wrong.  But
> perhaps the you who waited 5 seconds is simply the OM you will be forever.
>  Problems defining personal identity only creep in between the extremes
> of believing every OM is a unique observer and believing all OMs belong to
> the same observer.  The latter idea is more interesting to me, as it yields
> reasons for why we should plan and work for the future, and why it is good
> to treat others as they would like to be treated, while the former offers no
> reason, or even ability to try or do anything.

You can't deny that it *seems* there is a next OM and it *seems* that
there is a set of OM's constituting your life. This would happen even
if in fact all the OM's were completely separate, disconnected
entities. In other words, the question of whether the OM's are
separate or belong to the one observer is meaningless, since there is
no subjective difference.

Stathis Papaioannou
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to